If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

I hate this encircling argument. It is so easy to do it on total war but on the field it was not easy. Communication problems, visibility limits and huge distance to cross to perform it. Accept the fact: Total War is just a game and is not even close to 10% of realism.

The true heroes of science are the defenders of open-access like

Alexandra Elbakyan. Even in my country, Switzerland, we cannot afford the access to all the publishers material. Sci-hub and Library Genesis help thousands of researchers in the world. Support them.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

Originally Posted by Genava

I hate this encircling argument. It is so easy to do it on total war but on the field it was not easy. Communication problems, visibility limits and huge distance to cross to perform it. Accept the fact: Total War is just a game and is not even close to 10% of realism.

Well Genava, the point of the discussion isn't to complain that TW and EB2 are not realistic enough, I fully accept that it's a game. But, many of us playing the game like to set our own house rules and roleplay limitations to make the game more fun for ourselves, and really this thread is asking what kind of house rules people set for themselves. And there's nothing wrong about trying to figure out ways to make the game more enjoyable.

You do have a point though, the instant tactical decision making and omniscience of any TW player (the AI too) would make any force like cavalry probably quite overpowered in real life too, but they didn't have that luxury.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

Originally Posted by Cryoshakespeare

Well Genava, the point of the discussion isn't to complain that TW and EB2 are not realistic enough, I fully accept that it's a game. But, many of us playing the game like to set our own house rules and roleplay limitations to make the game more fun for ourselves, and really this thread is asking what kind of house rules people set for themselves. And there's nothing wrong about trying to figure out ways to make the game more enjoyable.

You do have a point though, the instant tactical decision making and omniscience of any TW player (the AI too) would make any force like cavalry probably quite overpowered in real life too, but they didn't have that luxury.

I didn't complain because for me it is not a problem. I like arcade game, I don't want to lose all my free time just for a game. I only want to highlight that the engine is far too limited to even think you can have a true roleplay. There is countless examples of battle where the troops got crazy because they think that their general died or because they thought the enemy has taken their camp with all their belongings. Because lack of information was the most common problem at this time. There are too much things that are missing from the engine to permit a roleplay experience. Even the fact that the field camp is missing from the battle is killing the possibility to reproduce the outcomes of a lot of ancient battles.

The true heroes of science are the defenders of open-access like

Alexandra Elbakyan. Even in my country, Switzerland, we cannot afford the access to all the publishers material. Sci-hub and Library Genesis help thousands of researchers in the world. Support them.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

Geneva is righht.

I too had this problem as OP, and i did Limit myself a lot in EB 1 because of it. But ya know what, I find myself still having fun, If you really are tired of winning a lot, use the create_unit command create some badass AI armies, and create a crappy army for yourself. OR what i find myself doing, Once i send a unit into battle, they stay there. If my infantry gets in a fight they stay in that small area,

As you already stated, Dont send your cavalry on their flanks, pretend you have no idea what the heck is on either side, Pretend you dont even know the area (if your invading) and when your defendinng you can do thhe usual and just pretend it was your general hiding his loyal cavalry in the forest and having thhem wait for his runner to show up in order to flank . The create_unit cheat is really a blessing, as it allows you to create some really good enemy armies to fight, If you play on H or VH and create a good army withh MAX XP vs your army with max XP you can actually still lose, even with superior tactics. If you find yourself winning too much create an army you can lose, and create a strong enemy army that you will have to fight a lot. Realistically a lot of units cant even be used the way they were suppose to be used.

Catranan for instance, and other Skrimishers if the game allowed should be able to sneak and hide everywhere! and that way you can sneak move into the forest or thhe sides and throw javelins. and so could the enemy engine wont allow this, so we just have to make due with using them as front line skirmishers who throw their javs and run behind the other infantry.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

Originally Posted by moisesjns

Geneva is righht.

I too had this problem as OP, and i did Limit myself a lot in EB 1 because of it. But ya know what, I find myself still having fun, If you really are tired of winning a lot, use the create_unit command create some badass AI armies, and create a crappy army for yourself. OR what i find myself doing, Once i send a unit into battle, they stay there. If my infantry gets in a fight they stay in that small area,

As you already stated, Dont send your cavalry on their flanks, pretend you have no idea what the heck is on either side, Pretend you dont even know the area (if your invading) and when your defendinng you can do thhe usual and just pretend it was your general hiding his loyal cavalry in the forest and having thhem wait for his runner to show up in order to flank . The create_unit cheat is really a blessing, as it allows you to create some really good enemy armies to fight, If you play on H or VH and create a good army withh MAX XP vs your army with max XP you can actually still lose, even with superior tactics. If you find yourself winning too much create an army you can lose, and create a strong enemy army that you will have to fight a lot. Realistically a lot of units cant even be used the way they were suppose to be used.

Catranan for instance, and other Skrimishers if the game allowed should be able to sneak and hide everywhere! and that way you can sneak move into the forest or thhe sides and throw javelins. and so could the enemy engine wont allow this, so we just have to make due with using them as front line skirmishers who throw their javs and run behind the other infantry.

Some thoughts on these issues:
- I find disabling the minimap and limiting the camera to help somehow in getting the immersion - you simply don't know where that flank is, so it's more difficult to get around it.
- another home-rule may be not to check the initial AI army - you don't right-click on the AI army before the battle,
- Indeed, I've always wondered how realistic are the advises put occasionally on the forum to get the javelin men to behind of the AI army and throw the projectiles from such a position. I find it quite a-historical and perhaps the home-rule should be to throw javelins only from the front.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

My big issue is making stacks full of about 4-5 unit types which work well in cohesion for anvil and hammer combat since I've played mainly as Hellenistic factions and Rome. I mean I know it's repetitive, but if a King or commander had the finances, resources, man power and administrative ability to create a semi-professional or professional core of troops to operate around this tactic, why not? It works.

I'm about to start a campaign as Carthage and I hope the early game where you are more reliant on mercenaries and 'foreign manpower' forces me to atleast operate with more skirmishers which I tend to neglect.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

I rarely use skirmishers to flank and throw javelins at their rear. I try to let them throw all their javelins then fall behind main line to act as reserve. Balkan and Anatolian skirmishers are good at this because they have decent attack and defense and more armor/bigger shields sometimes. I also restrict cavalry to move behind their line until they begin routing.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

Just play as the Sabaeans and don't recruit mercenary horseman. They don't have any factional cavalry units as they didn't deploy them until the turn of the millennium. Even then they never numbered more than two hundred if memory serves me well.

Re: Non-Cavalry Tactics

I find that as Mediterranean factions a quarter of my army is usually comprised of javelin skirmishers that have some (or a lot! Peltenai I'm looking at you guys!) melee ability.
I usually have them skirmishing a bit ahead of my front line. Their role is quite literally to screen my more valuable units by absorbing the initial missiles (like deadly Spanish or Roman javelins) before the main clash. Against skirmisher cav, i have them hold the position instead and slug it out.
I have the skirmishers fall back behind my front line only if they run out of ammo, get charged by the enemy main line, or charged by their heavier cav.
Here's where the fun part begins. After pulling them back, i put them in guard mode and have all of them form a line somewhat behind my main line but offset to the left or right flank such that the middle skirmisher unit is directly behind the outermost front line unit on the left or right depending on which flank needs more coverage. This is where you actually WAIT for the enemy to get nicely engaged with the flank of your outermost front-liner. This creates a sort of crossfire for enemies engaging the flank unit of your front line. If you're out of ammo you can just charge the flanking enemy unit. If the enemy charges the skirmisher line instead i have them duke it out while heavier reserves come to take over or my cav goes around the back. This works against most infantry or cav because my flanking front-liners are usually well-armored and the surrounded-morale mechanic works to my favor in either case. If the enemy tries going around the skirmishers too, just charge your skirmishers to intercept beforehand. Skirmishers are faster than most troops that try flank attacks. As the fight progresses you can shift this line to start your own flanking or have them break off to quickly support your cav against difficult units.
Against smaller armies, i find that the skirmishers don't need to retreat at all. They hold the enemy or even charge them while my cav goes around.
In battles where i need to race against the ai to an important hill, cav and skirmishers with skirmish mode off are essential. Take the hill and the elevation becomes their armor against enemy heavier troops that tired themselves running to get there. The skirmishers let my heavier troops take their time marching and conserve energy.
You may be wondering why i use skirmishers in such a hazardous manner. It's because there are certain early battle situations that cause unavoidable casualties regardless of armor (javelin openings anyone?). You want lighter troops to take the brunt of these losses while marching on campaign so as to preserve the heavier ones for sieges. A lot of the skirmishers end up recovering after battle anyways since the casualties are usually from missiles. Skirmishers are also one of the most easily-replaced units out there. Skirmishers are THE most cost-effective unit to get your heavy troops in one piece across the campaign map to the heavy wall-fighting where they're most needed.

A few notes about how i play as context:
- VH battle difficulty
- i ALWAYS try to get my troops the elevation advantage. This is especially critical (but easiest) to do with light units like skirmishers
- when i say skirmishers, i mean javelin infantry with skirmish mode that have some melee ability (peltenai, illyrioi peltestai, velites, promachoi, ITALIAN MERCENARIES <3)
- max 4 cav including 2 FM. Oftentimes my 2 non-fm cav are light or medium since they're widely available and can work with lighter troops very well in positioning fights

Seriously people, try using skirmishers as secondary line infantry in set battles. If your front-line is an expensive wall, think of the skirmishers as a cheap mobile shield that can block or bash. For positioning battles, combine them with light/med cav to quickly take and hold important positions while your heavier troops walk. In non-siege battles, my lightest and fastest troops are way more involved than my main line. My elite reserves are usually completely uninvolved. My lighter troops also tend to be the most experienced.

I started off playing TW as a sucker for heavy elite units. i still am. However, using lighter/faster units as my most active element really made me appreciate what the overall mod is about and the grander role of every unit that the EB2 team worked so hard to balance out. I also respect stamina on heavier units and also the heavier units themselves that much more now and try my very best to keep them pristine for when hits the fan.

Lighter troops and cav made my TW experience so much more enjoyable. It breathed new life into the gameplay!